WATER GOVERNANCE IN URBAN INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS: AN INFRASTRUCTURE LENS PERSPECTIVE ON MUKURU, NAIROBI AND KYA SANDS, JOHANNESBURG IRENE WANJIRU NGUNJIRI A dissertation submitted to the Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. January 2022 ii DECLARATION I declare that this thesis is my own unaided work. It is being submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. It has not been submitted before for any degree or examination at any other university. Part of this thesis has been presented at the: SIID 9th Annual Postgraduate Conference, University of Sheffield, United Kingdom, April, 2018. Modes of Everyday Water Governance in Informal Settlements in Developing Countries: A Literature Review. The 4th World Social Science Forum, 25th-28th September, 2018. Everyday Water Governance in Informal Settlements in Developing Countries: The Case of Mukuru, Nairobi, Kenya. Fukuoka, Japan. World Water Congress, 2020, Daegu, South Korea. Water Governance in Informal Settlements in Developing Countries: The Case of Kya Sands, Johannesburg, South Africa. Accepted for conference peer-reviewed proceedings publication. Roaf, V., Potter, A., Ngunjiri, I, and Schreiner, B. (2020). Human Rights and Integrity: Implications for Informal Settlement Water and Sanitation. Social-Economic Rights Institute (SERI) and Water Integrity Network (WIN) Joint Publication. 24-02-2022 ----------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- (Signature of candidate) (Date) iii ABSTRACT Through an extended notion of infrastructure as constituted of materials, people (human bodies and social relations) and knowledge, the study explored the diverse elements of infrastructure that residents of informal settlements have to navigate for continued access to water services as well as how the navigation transforms the normative mode of governance of access towards non-normative modes. The study employed a qualitative and comparative case-study approach based on everyday practices in access to water services in the informal settlements of Mukuru (in Nairobi, Kenya) and Kya Sands (in Johannesburg, South Africa). Primary data (from interviews, focus group dialogues–FGDs and transect-walks for direct observations) were combined with secondary data for thematic analyses guided by Atlas ti coupled with matrix-based data coding approach. Emerging from the extended infrastructure lens coupled with point-of-access manoeuvres, the study contributes towards urban governance discourse through a deepened understanding of how access to water services in informal settlements is mediated through an assemblage of human and non-human elements of infrastructure. Overall, the study demonstrates how unwarranted privileging of the “expert” through biasing of formal policies and practices towards normative modes of water governance fails to gain traction on the ground, especially when contested through diverse manoeuvres of everyday practices which transform the normative to non-normative modes of governance. One of the most salient insights of the study is the elevation of the critical role of people-as-infrastructure (in terms of the human body and social relations) in access to water services. Specifically, the study reveals diverse embodied intersectionalities (such as by race, gender and class) of people-as-infrastructure with regard to access to water services especially in the last-mile delivery to residents’ houses. The study further extends the understanding of Simone’s notion of people-as-infrastructure where it primarily translates into women-as-infrastructure. Given the ongoing racial inequality in post-apartheid South Africa, the understanding of women-as-infrastructure is further intersected by race to form the ‘black-female-body’ as infrastructure in the case of Kya Sands. The people-as- infrastructure element thus opened up avenues for non-normative manoeuvres such as contestation/subversion of rules and tampering with material infrastructure by actors in order to ensure access. The study thus foregrounds the perpetual “visibility” of material hydraulic infrastructure in informal settlements contrary to Heidegger’s argument that infrastructure is only visible when it breaks down. Through the knowledge component, the study demonstrates how the normative mode of governance gets inverted/subverted when state officials resort to the situated knowledge of residents to accomplish diverse management roles such as repairs of the material infrastructure where infrastructural knowledge by men becomes more visible as the critical infrastructure element. Key Terms: access to water services, assemblage, everyday practices, non-material infrastructure, non-normative mode of governance, people-as-infrastructure, state abstinence and absence iv DEDICATION This work is dedicated to my beloved parents, my number one cheer leaders; Mr. Naftali Wanjohi Ngunjiri and Mrs. Jane Wanjiku Ngunjiri v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis is a labour of love and could not have been accomplished without the help of several people. First and foremost, I thank God for his grace and strength to complete this work. My deepest gratitude to my supervisors, Prof. Margot Rubin and Prof. Daniel Irurah who helped me to accomplish this task. Both of you have made Albert Einstein’s words ‘If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants’ a reality for me. I learnt a lot from their dedication, support and work ethic. I believe that they both have made me a better human being as well as shaped and built my research and writing skills. Thank you for making the journey smooth for me, setting the high targets and believing in me. I will forever treasure this experience. A word of gratitude for Prof. Claire Benit-Gbaffou for the suggested readings in Urban governance at the beginning of the research which were useful in anchoring the study. May God bless you all. This research was undertaken with a three-year funding from the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa through the Chair of Spatial Analysis and City Planning at School of Architecture and Planning at the University of the Witwatersrand. Opinions expressed and conclusions expressed in this thesis are the author’s and not the funders. I am also indebted to Strathmore University for the overwhelming support that enabled me to finish this work. Special gratitude to the residents of Mukuru and Kya Sands for participating in the research. I am particularly indebted to my research assistants and guide. Thank you, Dr. Morgen Z. for support and encouragement. You gave me the ‘spanners’ to unlock the hurdles and pointed out the landmines along the way. Gratitude to Dr. T. Mathibe and Dr. V Ochanda for reading this work (from proposal stage till now) and giving me invaluable feedback. Dr. Tiren for being a faithful companion throughout the course of the PhD. Special gratitude to Dr. Elizabeth Gachenga my friend and mentor. Thank you, Liz for helping me to see things in perspective! You have played such a big role in this. May God bless you. Gratitude to my family in South Africa and Kenya especially Carmel Fennessey, Carol Kiilur, Maria Otero, Alice, Anne, Lillo, Karembo and Agueda- you guys rock! To all my friends especially Naomi May, Sarah Muigai, Joan Wanjiku, Jackie Wambua, Valentine Maingi and Jean Makaka. Thank you for everything. Special thanks to Kitonyi Saiti for always having my back and supporting me while I was in South Africa. A big thank you to my friend Mary Mutinda-Kipkemboi for encouraging me to take up the Mukuru case study. My beloved friend Sabrina Jardin for constant encouragement and following up the thesis’ progress. Jess thank you very much for your words of comfort and affirmation. My PhD colleagues Brian Murahwa, Sarita Pillay and Dr. Miriam Maina were special and great companions along the journey. Thank you for the time we spent working together in the office, the deep and meaningful conversations and the memorable evenings at the PIG. Finally, a special thank you to all my family especially my siblings Charles Ngunjiri and Dr. Linda Sabaya, my nephews; Nidal, Jay, Ethan and Dilan and niece Skye and my parents for tireless support, love and encouragement which helped me finish this work. Thank you especially for the ‘finish quickly and come home’ statement which kept me on track and helped me not to lose momentum. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION ............................................................................................................................................................. ii ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................................................. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................................................................. v CHAPTER ONE ............................................................................................................................................................. 1 1 BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION OF THE STUDY .............................................................................................. 1 1.1 BACKGROUND TO WATER GOVERNANCE .............................................................................. 1 1.2 ACCESS TO WATER SERVICES IN INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS ............................................. 3 1.3 CONCEPTUALIZATION OF ACCESS TO WATER SERVICES ................................................... 4 1.4 INFRASTRUCTURE AND EVERYDAY PRACTICES ................................................................... 6 1.5 IDENTIFICATION OF THE KNOWLEDGE GAP ........................................................................... 8 1.6 PROBLEM STATEMENT ............................................................................................................ 12 1.6.1 Research Question ............................................................................................................ 13 1.6.2 Working Hypothesis .......................................................................................................... 14 1.6.3 Delimiting the scope of the study .................................................................................... 14 1.7 THE RESEARCH STRATEGY: LINEAR OR ITERATIVE? ........................................................ 17 1.8 THE STRUCTURE OF THE THESIS .......................................................................................... 19 CHAPTER TWO .......................................................................................................................................................... 21 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................................................................... 21 2.1 INTRODUCTION - AN OVERVIEW OF THE THEORETICAL FIELDS....................................... 21 2.2 THEORY OF INFRASTRUCTURE .............................................................................................. 22 2.2.1 Infrastructure as Material .................................................................................................. 25 2.2.2 People as infrastructure .................................................................................................... 29 2.2.3 Knowledge as Infrastructure ............................................................................................ 31 2.3 THEORY OF ASSEMBLAGES ................................................................................................... 32 2.4 GOVERNANCE AND THE ROLE OF THE STATE .......................................................................... 36 2.5 ACTORS, POWER AND AGENCY ................................................................................................... 41 2.6 BOURDIEU’S FIELD THEORY ......................................................................................................... 46 2.7 COPRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 51 3 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHOD OF STUDY ............................................................................................. 58 3.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 58 3.2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................... 59 vii 3.2.1 Case Study Strategy .......................................................................................................... 61 3.2.2 Research Site Description- Mukuru and Kya Sands informal settlements ................... 62 3.3 DATA COLLECTION METHODS ................................................................................................ 69 3.4 RESEARCH METHOD BY SUB-QUESTIONS AND THEIR RELATED DATA COLLECTION TOOLS .................................................................................................. 80 3.5 THE POLITICS OF ACCESS ...................................................................................................... 83 3.6 LIMITATIONS OF DATA ............................................................................................................. 85 3.7 DATA ANALYSES ...................................................................................................................... 86 3.8 POSITIONALITY ......................................................................................................................... 95 3.9 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................................................... 97 3.10 CONCLUSION............................................................................................................................. 98 CHAPTER FOUR....................................................................................................................................................... 100 4 CONDITIONS AND CHALLENGES OF WATER SERVICES IN MUKURU SETTLEMENT ............................ 100 4.1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 100 4.2 LOCATION, DEVELOPMENT AND EVOLUTION OF MUKURU KWA NJENGA SETTLEMENT . …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….105 4.2.1 Land Ownership and Land Use ...................................................................................... 109 4.2.2 Settlement Morphology and Service Provision ............................................................. 113 4.3 CONDITIONS AND CHALLENGES OF WATER SERVICES IN MUKURU SETTLEMENT ..... 114 4.3.1 Legal and Institutional Frameworks in Kenya ...................................................................... 114 4.3.1 Some Key Institutions in Water Services in Kenya ...................................................... 118 4.4 SETTING THE STAGE: WATER SERVICES SITUATION IN MUKURU .................................. 123 4.4.1 Typologies of Cartels in Mukuru .................................................................................... 127 4.4.2 Factors that lead to the dominance of the cartels ........................................................ 129 4.5 SOURCES OF WATER IN MUKURU ....................................................................................... 132 4.5.1 Water Vendors ................................................................................................................. 133 4.5.2 Boreholes and Wells ....................................................................................................... 138 4.5.3 Rainwater Harvesting ...................................................................................................... 140 4.6 WATER USES AND DISPOSAL ............................................................................................... 141 4.7 INITIAL REFLECTIONS ON CONDITIONS AND CHALLENGES OF WATER SERVICES IN MUKURU ………………………………………………………………………………………………..146 CHAPTER FIVE ......................................................................................................................................................... 148 5 ACTORS AND THEIR PRACTICES IN THE GOVERNANCE OF WATER SERVICES IN MUKURU ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..148 viii 5.1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 148 5.2 ACTORS IN WATER SERVICES IN MUKURU ........................................................................ 150 5.3 STATE ACTORS ....................................................................................................................... 156 5.3.1 Local Administrative Officials and the Police ............................................................... 156 5.3.2 State Practices ................................................................................................................. 157 5.4 NON-STATE ACTORS .............................................................................................................. 163 5.4.1 Water Vendors ................................................................................................................. 163 5.4.2 Water Vendor Practices .................................................................................................. 166 5.4.3 Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), Community Based Organizations (CBOs) and Self-Help Groups (SHGs) ......................................................................................................... 173 5.4.4 Mukuru Residents ............................................................................................................ 176 5.4.5 Residents, Practices ........................................................................................................ 181 5.5 INITIAL REFLECTIONS ON ACTORS IN WATER SERVICES IN MUKURU .......................... 190 CHAPTER SIX ........................................................................................................................................................... 193 6 CONDITIONS AND CHALLENGES OF WATER SERVICES IN KYA SANDS................................................ 193 6.1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 193 6.2 LOCATION, DEVELOPMENT AND EVOLUTION OF KYA SANDS ........................................ 198 6.3 LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKS OF WATER SERVICES IN SOUTH AFRICA …………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 203 6.3.1 A brief Overview of the Historical Context of South Africa .......................................... 203 6.3.2 Selected Legal and Institutional Frameworks in South Africa ..................................... 205 6.4 CONDITIONS AND CHALLENGES OF WATER SERVICES IN KYA SANDS ........................ 214 6.4.1 An Overview of the Water Services Situation in Kya Sands ........................................ 214 6.4.2 Water Access, Use and Disposal ................................................................................... 216 6.5 INITIAL REFLECTIONS ON THE CONDITIONS AND CHALLENGES OF WATER SERVICES IN KYA SANDS ………………………………………………………………………………………………..230 CHAPTER SEVEN..................................................................................................................................................... 232 7 ACTORS AND THEIR PRACTICES IN THE GOVERNANCE OF WATER SERVICES IN KYA SANDS ........ 232 7.1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 232 7.2 STATE ACTORS IN KYA SANDS ............................................................................................ 233 7.2.1 Political Party Representatives and Ward Councilors.................................................. 233 7.2.2 State Practices ................................................................................................................. 238 7.3 NON-STATE ACTORS IN KYA SANDS ................................................................................... 241 ix 7.3.1 Settlement Committee ..................................................................................................... 242 7.3.2 Kya Sands Community .................................................................................................... 243 7.3.3 Gender Dynamics ............................................................................................................ 245 7.4 PRACTICES OF RESIDENTS................................................................................................... 245 7.5 INITIAL REFLECTIONS ON ACTORS AND THEIR PRACTICES IN KYA SANDS ................. 251 CHAPTER EIGHT ...................................................................................................................................................... 253 8 CROSS-CASE ANALYSIS OF WATER GOVERNANCE IN MUKURU AND KYA SANDS INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS ......................................................................................................................................................... 253 8.1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 253 8.2 CONDITIONS AND CHALLENGES OF WATER SERVICES IN MUKURU AND KYA SANDS …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….254 8.3 INFRASTRUCTURE .................................................................................................................. 257 8.3.1 Material Infrastructure ..................................................................................................... 257 8.3.2 People as Infrastructure .................................................................................................. 259 8.3.3 Knowledge as Infrastructure .......................................................................................... 261 8.4 THE ROLE OF STATE AND GOVERNANCE ................................................................................. 263 8.6 GENDER AND ETHNICITY DYNAMICS ......................................................................................... 270 8.7 CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................. 271 CHAPTER NINE ........................................................................................................................................................ 273 9 CONSOLIDATION OF KEY FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................ 273 9.1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 273 9.2 REVISITING THE SUB-QUESTIONS AND RESEARCH METHODS ....................................... 273 9.3 KEY RESEARCH FINDINGS .................................................................................................... 275 9.3.1 People-as-infrastructure ................................................................................................. 275 9.3.2 Agency of human and non-human infrastructure ......................................................... 276 9.3.3 Politics of (in)visibility ..................................................................................................... 277 9.3.4 Normative and non-normative mode of water governance .......................................... 279 9.4 RE-ARTICULATING THE ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION ........................................................... 281 9.5 SIGNIFICANCE AND CONTRIBUTION OF THE STUDY ......................................................... 283 9.6 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY ................................................................................................. 286 9.7 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ................................................................ 287 x APPENDICES APPENDIX 1: Summary of the Socioeconomic Characteristics of the Resident Interviews ....... 314 APPENDIX 2: FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS IN MUKURU AND KYA SANDS ............................. 315 APPENDIX 2a: Mukuru Focus Group Discussion Schedule ............................................................ 316 APPENDIX 2b: Focus Group Discussion Guide employed in Mukuru ............................................ 318 APPENDIX 2c: Focus Group Discussion in Mukuru ......................................................................... 319 APPENDIX 2d: Focus Group Discussion in Kya Sands ................................................................... 325 APPENDIX 3: IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS ............................................................................................. 328 APPENDIX 3a: Household Interview in Kya Sands ........................................................................... 328 APPENDIX 3b: Household Interview 1 in Mukuru ............................................................................. 330 APPENDIX 3c: Excerpts from an Interview with a Water Vendor .................................................... 332 APPENDIX 4: KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEWS ................................................................................ 335 APPENDIX 4a: Excerpts of a key informant interview with JW official ........................................... 336 APPENDIX 4b: Excerpts of a Key Informant Interview with NWSC official ..................................... 339 APPENDIX 5: EXCERPTS FROM THE FIELD DIARY ....................................................................... 341 APPENDIX 6: PHOTOGRAPHS FROM THE TRANSECT WALKS ................................................... 344 APPENDIX 7a: Summary of showing the count of standpipes in Kya Sands ................................ 352 APPENDIX 7b: Transect Walk Checklist ............................................................................................ 353 APPENDIX 8: Sections of the South African Constitution addressing water services access…354 APPENDIX 9a: Detailed Atlas ti Mapping of Everyday Practices………………………………………………..353 APPENDIX 9b: A Screen Shot of Coding on Atlas ti……………………………………………………………….354 APPENDIX 9c: Working on the quotation level in Atlas ti…………………..……………………………………..355 APPENDIX 10: The NACOSTI Research Authorization ..................................................................... 358 APPENDIX 11: University of the Witwatersrand Ethics Certificate ................................................. 359 xi LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1.1: Overall mapping of the study…………………………………………………………………………..16 Figure 1.2: The iterative research strategy employed in the study……………………………………………...18 Figure 2.1: The assemblage of infrastructure …………………………………………………………………….26 Figure 2.2: Typologies of coproduction…………………………………………………………………………….54 Figure 2.3: The conceptual framework of the study………………………………………………………………57 Figure 3.1: Location of Mukuru settlement in Kenya……………………………………………………………..62 Figure 3.2: Location of Kya Sands and the surrounding areas………………………………………………….63 Figure 3.3: A child playing with water at a standpipe in Kya Sands…………………………………………….76 Figure 3.4: Tracklog of a transect walk in Kya Sands…………………………………………………………….79 Figure 3.5: Flow chart diagram of data analyses for the study………………………………………………….88 Figure 3.6: Key themes and sub-themes of sub-question 1……………………………………………………. 92 Figure 3.7: Chart showing the themes and sub-themes of sub-questions 2 and 3……………………………93 Figure 3.8: Aligning the conceptual framework, the working hypothesis and the sub-questions…………....94 Figure 4.1: Modified map of the precincts in Mukuru informal settlement…………………………………….106 Figure 4.2: Modified Google Earth satellite images on the growth of Mukuru from 2002 to 2016…………107 Figure 4.3: Mukuru sections or zones…………………………………………………………………………….109 Figure 4.4: The tenure-morphology-service provision triad…………………………………………………….113 Figure 4.5: The NWSC office in Mukuru………………………………………………………………………….121 Figure 4.6: Abandoned chambers in Mukuru in Zone 48 and Milimani……………………………………….122 Figure 4.7: The view inside a chamber and pipe connections from the chamber……………………………124 Figure 4.8: Existing water supply network in Mukuru…………………………………………………………...125 Figure 4.9: A water point in Sisal Village operated from a vendor's house…………………………………..135 Figure 4.10: Water pipes running in unsanitary conditions in Section 48 and Moto Moto Villages………..136 Figure 4.11: A functional borehole operated by a mosque…………………………………………………….139 Figure 4.12: A functional borehole owned by a local primary school…………………………………………139 Figure 4.13: A layout of the typical housing 'plot'……………………………………………………………….142 Figure 4.14: An effluent pipe emptying wastewater into the Ngong River in Sisal Village…………………143 Figure 4.15: Wastewater disposal pipe from the first floor of a vertical structure in Vietnam Village…….144 xii Figure 4.16: The main wastewater disposal tunnel in Zone 48……………………………………………….145 Figure 5.1: State and non-state actors in the Kenyan water sector governance…………………………….150 Figure 5.2: The remnant of the burnt overland pipes in Section 48…………………………………………...158 Figure 5.3: Color coding of pipes for identification by vendors………………………………………………...171 Figure 5.4: Color coded pipes at water tanks by vendors………………………………………………………172 Figure 5.5: Dysfunctional donor funded ablution blocks operated by CBO and SHG……………………….173 Figure 5.6: A pre-paid water dispenser (PPD)…………………………………………………………………...175 Figure 5.7: An abandoned ablution block in Riara village………………………………………………………176 Figure 5.8: Elements of the water gift…………………………………………………………………………….185 Figure 5.9: An ablution block in Milimani village adapted into a chicken pen………………………………...189 Figure 5.10: A water kiosk in Moto Moto village adapted into a kindergarten school……………………….189 Figure 6.1: Satellite image of Kya Sands precincts and Houtkoppen 193-IQ Portion 5…………………….198 Figure 6.2: Satellite image of the five sections of the settlement………………………………………………199 Figure 6.3: The growth of Kya Sands between 2007-2019…………………………………………………….202 Figure 6.4: The role players in water services in South Africa………………………………………………....209 Figure 6.5: A standard standpipe in Section D with six taps…………………………………………………...215 Figure 6.6: On the left, leaking taps at a standpipe and on the right, "an all taps" closed standpipe……...216 Figure 6.7: Two male residents washing dishes at a standpipe in Section A………………………………...218 Figure 6.8: Illegal connection to a household in Section D……………………………………………………..219 Figure 6.9: The environment around a standpipe in Sections D and C……………………………………….220 Figure 6.10: A cup used to scoop from a jerrican in a house in section D……………………………………221 Figure 6.11: The aftermath of a fire in Kya Sands Section A…………………………………………………..222 Figure 6.12: A domestic garden situated in a demarcated stand in Section C………………………………223 Figure 6.13: A greenhouse located in Section E near Agnes Road…………………………………………..224 Figure 6.14: A communal garden in Section D………………………………………………………………….224 Figure 6.15: A car wash situated next to a standpipe in Section E on Agnes Road………………………..225 Figure 6.16: Jerry rigged wastewater tunnel emptying in Jukskei River in Section A………………………226 Figure 6.17: Poor waste-water disposal next to chemical toilets in Section D………………………………226 Figure 6.18: A burst wastewater pipe in Section B……………………………………………………………..227 Figure 6.19: A resident sprinkling wastewater on the walkway in Section C and a resident disposing accumulated wastewater at a standpipe in Section D…………………………………………………………..228 xiii Figure 6.20: Mats used to absorb wastewater overflow in Section A…………………………………………229 Figure 6.21: Plastic crates used to hold back floods and wastewater in Section A………………………….230 Figure 7.1: A disconnected standpipe in Section D……………………………………………………………..241 Figure 7.2: Improvised repairs of a leaking tap by residents in Section E……………………………………248 Figure 7.3: A resident washing clothes at the standpipe in Section A………………………………………...249 Figure 9.1: Water governance model……………………………………………………………………………..280 Figure 9.2: Updated conceptual framework reflecting findings and contribution of the study………………285 xiv LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1.1. Articulating the knowledge gap based on the empirical context and the theoretical understanding………………………………………………………………………………………………………….9 Table 2.1: The layers of pertinent theoretical sources……………………………………………………………23 Table 3.1: Summary of research methodology using the 'research onion’ metaphor…………………………60 Table 3.2: Criteria for selecting the case studies………………………………………………………………….65 Table 3.3: Summary of the number of respondents/iterations of the data collection methods………………71 Table 3.4: Distribution of key informants in the study sites………………………………………………………73 Table 3.5: Links between the research sub-questions and the overall research strategy……………………81 Table 3.6: Thematic analysis using Atlas ti and manual data coding matrices………………………………..89 Table 4.1: Conditions and key challenges of water access, use and disposal in Mukuru…………………..102 Table 4.2: Summary of the legal and policy milestones on water services governance in Kenya…………118 Table 4.3: Factors that lead to the dominance of cartels……………………………………………………….130 Table 4.4: Summary of the characteristics of water supplied by water vendors……………………………..134 Table 4.5: A summary of the sources of water in Mukuru settlement…………………………………………141 Table 5.1: The actors, their roles and practices in water services in Mukuru………………………………...151 Table 5.2: Elements of people-as-infrastructure in relation to governance…………………………………..190 Table 6.1: The conditions and key challenges of water access, use and disposal in Kya Sands………….194 Table 6.2: Government level of water services institutions in South Africa…………………………………..210 Table 7.1: The actors, their roles and practices in water services in Kya Sands…………………………….234 Table 7.2: Summary of the rules of access to water services in Kya Sands…………………………………250 Table 8.1: Cross-case analyses of water access, use and disposal…………………………………………. 255 Table 9.1: Summary of the original contribution of the study…………………………………………………..282 Table A0.1: The outline of the appendices………………………………………………………………………311 xv LIST OF BOXES Page Box 4.1: Excerpts from field diary on 26-08-18………………………………………………………………….145 Box 5.1: Excerpts from field diary on 20-08-18………………………………………………………………….159 Box 5.2: Media reports on water in Mukuru…………………………………………………………………… 187 Box 6.2: Excerpts from the field diary 28-11-18…………………………………………………………………220 xvi LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS CBD Central Business District CoJ City of Johannesburg CGN County Government of Nairobi CPR Common Pool Resources FGD Focus Group Discussions IDRC International Development Research Centre JW Johannesburg Water Company NUA New Urban Agenda NWSC Nairobi Water and Sewerage Company NRW Non-Revenue Water SDG Sustainable Development Goal SPA Special Planning Area UN United Nations UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNEP United Nations Environmental Programme Wits University of the Witwatersrand 1 CHAPTER ONE 1 BACKGROUND AND MOTIVATION OF THE STUDY “The water crisis is largely a crisis of governance” Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD, 2011:1) 1.1 BACKGROUND TO WATER GOVERNANCE In February 2017, I found myself engrossed in deep conversation with KK, an employee of Muungano wa Wanavijiji, which is the Kenyan Federation of Slum Dwellers founded in 1996. KK had been working in the organization since its inception. Both of us were part of a consortium commissioned by the County Government of Nairobi (CGN), to conduct a situational analyses of basic services provision in Mukuru informal settlement. The study was motivated by persistent protests by residents about the lack of services. As we walked through the settlement, I was puzzled by the dire situation and the “state of hopelessness” that I was witnessing. Besides, there were numerous plastic water pipes running throughout the settlement which the team members had to look out for so as not to trip. Around various water points there were queues of people waiting in line with yellow jerricans to purchase water. The conversation began when I asked KK how the situation had become so deplorable. KK began explaining to me about the service delivery woes in the settlement and at some point, he looked at me and lowering his voice said, “it’s the cartels”. He noticed the blank expression on my face and began to explain, “You see the cartels are like the mafia. They are like the government of this place and control access to basic services especially water. They determine who gets water, where, when, at what cost and frequency”. This comment left me questioning how residents in informal settlements such as Mukuru secure basic services. I wondered, do the residents have other options for water access apart from the “mafia”? How do they cope with inadequate water services in their homes? How do they manoeuvre life in the city in the absence of such a crucial service for survival? The struggle to access water in informal settlements is one that resonates with an increasing number of people not just in Kenya but globally. Contemporary debates recognize that water availability or scarcity is less fundamental than the question of governance (Future Directions International, 2020; OECD, 2011; Bjorkman, 2015). Many people in cities of the Global South have no access to water despite having enough water because power relations influence who has control and access to water services as well as who is 2 excluded from gaining access (Swyngedouw, 2009). In broad terms, water governance is defined as “the range of political, social, economic and administrative systems that are in place to develop and manage water resources, and the delivery of water services, at different levels of society” (Rogers and Hall, 2003:7). This definition elucidates the various components of water-related decision making. While all these components are important and interrelated, this study focuses on the political dimension of water governance which emphasizes equal rights and opportunities in decision-making especially with regard to access to resources. Power relations and political interests ultimately influence who gets access to water. In addition, Bakker and Morinville (2013) argue that the political and institutional dimensions of water governance have been overlooked in prevailing discussions on water access and yet they are an important part of water governance. The study analysed the formal and the everyday practices and negotiations of water access, use and disposal of denizens in informal settlements. Schwartz, Tutusaus, Rusca and Ahlers (2015) argue that water provision in urban areas is characterised by the existence of a range of modes of formal and informal water governance processes which are interlinked, mutually constitutive and create a labyrinth of water services provision systems. For instance, in informal settlements, formal elements such as application to the utility for a water connection and a service contract coexist with informal elements such as illegal connections for the same water. Thus, the web of water service provisioning systems is coproduced by various actors who interact through various infrastructure to access, control and distribute water services. Further, given the relative inadequacy of formal infrastructure in informal settlements, examining the formal aspects only provides only a partial understanding of water services provision and how things operate (Lawhon et al., 2014). Using extended notion of infrastructure as constituted of materials, people (human body and social relations) and knowledge, this comparative study endeavoured to compare how residents (who also constitute the infrastructure) in two informal settlements - Mukuru, Kenya and Kya Sands, Johannesburg, navigate and manoeuvre access to water services in a context of relative water scarcity. Intersectionalities in Simone’s (2004) notion of people-as infrastructure (human body and social relations) with regard to access to water services remained as the focus issue of the study. Specifically, the study argues that, in reality, within informal settlements, the notion of people-as-infrastructure is largely women-as-infrastructure. Further, in the context of post-apartheid South Africa, the black-female-body is a predominant part of the hydraulic infrastructure. 3 This chapter begins by presenting the motivation for attention on access to water services in informal settlements coupled with the conceptualization of the notion of water access as applied in this study. The problem statement, the research questions and the initial hypothesis are then articulated. Finally, the chapter presents an overview on the research strategy as well as the structure of the thesis. 1.2 ACCESS TO WATER SERVICES IN INFORMAL SETTLEMENTS Several reasons motivated for the attention on water services in informal settlements based on an everyday- practices approach. Firstly, the New Urban Agenda states that the proportion of people living in informal settlements in cities of developing countries is high and is predicted to continue growing (UN, 2016). It is estimated that 30% to 60% of the urban population in the global South live in informal settlements (Mitlin and Satterthwaite, 2013). In many of these cities, the majority of the urban dwellers do not have adequate water services, and the problem is further compounded by their lack of voice and influence (Olumuyiwa, 2016). Yet, informal spaces are both the result of visible links to the formal city as well as the social-political processes by the residents, among other actors (Kornienko, 2013). Secondly, although informal settlements provide temporary solutions to the consequences of rapid urbanization, they should not be viewed as sustainable options for the urban poor (Rocco and Ballegooijen, 2018). This is because residents of informal settlements are socially and economically disadvantaged while also being exposed to environmental hazards. Inadequate water services therefore only aggravate their situation by making them more vulnerable to exploitation (Olumuyiwa, 2016). While the residents are often excluded from access to services and other benefits from the state, such exclusion often serves as a call for them to devise coping mechanisms in order to increase their resilience. Thirdly, measures of water access based on the number of pipe connections fail to consider that the number of connections does not always translate to clean and potable water or functioning connections (Peloso, 2014; Satterthwaite, 2016). Besides, statistical measures do not reveal how the number of connections impact the daily reality of urban households in informal settlements regarding water access. Further, using the number of connections to infer access to water services fails to distinguish between enabling infrastructure versus functioning infrastructure. Enabling infrastructure is the presence of the infrastructure required to circulate water (Eales, 2009). On the other hand, functioning infrastructure is infrastructure that is working properly and thus delivers water services as and when required. This distinction is important 4 because mere presence of infrastructure does not reveal the experiences of residents in accessing potable water (Peloso, 2014; Satterthwaite, 2016). Likewise, statistics of connections do not indicate the extent to which the right to water is progressively attained by people who previously did not have access to water services (Dugard, 2016). Besides, aggregate statistics often hide the spatial disparities in access to water services due to political and geographical positioning. Aggregate statistics camouflage the number of unconnected residents and the costs the urban poor incur to obtain water. For example, these measures do not reveal how the number of connections impact the daily reality of the urban households in informal settlements who often have to rely on alternatives such as water tankers, water vendors or communal taps serving multiple households to meet their daily requirements of water. Equally, the rural/urban binary categorization makes the realities of informal settlements invisible by coding them as rural or urban during statistical analysis (ibid.). Lawhon et al., (2014) argue that pipe connections tell us even less about the realities of those who are outside the supply grid, as is the case with most households in informal settlements, and how they manage with the meagre amounts of water that they access by whatever means or practices they devise. Moreover, the presence of legislations promulgating universal access to water (the Water Services Regulation, 2001 and the Water Act, 2016 in South Africa and Kenya respectively) does not necessarily translate into reality in practice. 1.3 CONCEPTUALIZATION OF ACCESS TO WATER SERVICES In their effort to access water services, residents in informal settlements need to navigate uncertainties caused by irregular water availability. This study examines how such access to water services amidst irregular supply is mediated by both human and non-human elements of infrastructure. Although access is a multidimensional term, I hypothesise access along the proximate and the processual dimensions in line with Ranganathan and Balazs (2015) where the proximate dimension refers to the quality and quantity of water available while the processual dimension refers to the multi-layered power relations that allow people to obtain benefits from water. I find this explanation useful because a focus on both dimensions provides a more comprehensive view of water governance given that everyday practices are a form of governance and hence both become inseparable and interrelated. This study thus analysed not only the “microspheres of negotiation” in informal settlements for water access, use and disposal by households but also some inherent 5 attributes of water such as quality and quantity (Gandy, 2008:125). The analyses of the microspheres of everyday life brings out the fact that informal settlements are “places of bargaining between the formal and the informal, the legal and illegal that define the struggles of everyday life” (Kornienko, 2013:175). Equally, households are spaces where individuals have different interests, preferences and unequal power relations which determine individual household members’ access, use and disposal of resources (Button, 2017). Therefore, navigating access affects both inter-household and intra-household relations as people secure and compete for a scarce resource which shapes the “power relations in everyday life” (Velzeboer et al., 2017:2). In a paper titled ‘A Theory of Access’ Ribot and Peluso (2003) point out that access entails a bundle of powers that enables actors to gain, control and maintain the accrual of benefits from a resource. The paper has been regarded as instrumental in extending the notion of access beyond a bundle of rights to include social and power relations involved in deriving benefits from resources (Myers and Hansen, 2020). In order to assess how resources are accessed, the processes and relations employed by actors to derive benefits must be interrogated. In other words, the beneficiaries of the resources must be identified as well as the means that they rely on to obtain and sustain benefits from the resources. Further, the modes of accessing resources are constantly (re)configured since power relations changes in a similar manner to the sources of power (ibid.). Thus, access is best understood through investigating who, how and by what means people derive benefits from a resource. Access to, use and disposal of water are influenced by interhousehold and intrahousehold power relations. This study conceptualises power as diffused and dispersed, and in turn influences the actions and decisions related actors (Lawhon et al., 2014). This understanding of power as being diffuse and layered enables the analysis of “…power at work in subtle relations between actors through the sources of power they deploy to unveil how everyday hydraulic practices reproduce unequal access to water” (Velzeboer et al., 2017:3). Additionally, it allows us to go beyond binaries and reflect on intersectionalities such as age, gender, social and political connections in power relations which are critical in this study (Cornea, 2016; Harris et al., 2016). Given that access to water is both a physical and political process, the distribution of water reveals the power of actors as well as the networks within a particular space (Bawa, 2011; Ranganathan and Balazs, 2014). 6 Access, particularly in the global South, is continually (re)negotiated between actors at different spaces and time using various tactics and practices (Cornea, 2016). Ribot and Peluso (2003) theorize that while some actors gain control of resources others access resources through those who exercise control over the resources. This argument is important in explaining the reasons why some actors benefit from resources with or without rights to the resource since access analysis goes beyond property rights since access can be achieved ‘outside’ of the prevailing law and regulations. Given that the webs of power are (il)legible, a distinction between the control and maintenance of resources gives a nuanced understanding of access to resources. An actor controls access to resources when he mediates access to them while maintenance is exercising power in keeping access to resources open through deploying other resources as well as exercising power. Additionally, actors mediate access to water services through both human and non-human infrastructure. Importantly, in the African context, the colonial or apartheid legacies that influenced both the power relations between and among different actors as well as the physical infrastructures created inequalities in service provision and continue to shape the everyday experiences of access to services (Distretti, 2020). Many countries in the global South such as Kenya and South Africa have declared universal access to water services as a basic human right (see detailed discussions in Section 4.3.1 and 6.3.2). This right is premised on the non-substitutability of water as well as the fact that many other human rights are predicated on access to water services (Dugard, 2016). However, in spite of the right being legislated, inequalities in access to water services persist and at the same time, these same countries commodify water by turning it from a public good to a commodity that is subject to market forces (ibid) (see detailed appraisals of studies on access in Chapter 2). 1.4 INFRASTRUCTURE AND EVERYDAY PRACTICES This study interrogated how governance is mediated through infrastructure by examining how residents and other actors engage infrastructure to access water services in informal settlements. The use of the infrastructure lens to analyse governance is gaining traction in scholarly work to make explicit the nuances of the everyday experiences of residents in gaining and maintaining water access, use and disposal and the complexities inherent in everyday life within contemporary urban spaces (Graham and McFarlane, 2015) (see detailed review of studies on theory of assemblages in Section 2.3). 7 Water is a multi-layered and complex field of social, material, economic, legal as well as human rights concerns that are driven by the materiality of water itself and the technological requirements such as pipes and pumps (ibid.). Given that the material is a constitutive of how people engage the state, negotiations of urban residents over overt and covert properties of infrastructure are often intense and contentious (Wafer, 2011). Everyday practices produce infrastructure that is unequal, political and fluid, while at the same time, material/technical infrastructure configures everyday practices (Anand, 2015). Hence, infrastructure has gained prominence in political inquiry given that it enables or threatens everyday life with regard to access to water services (Meehan, 2014). Examining how the hydraulic infrastructure is structured by the residents and how, in turn, the infrastructures structure the behaviour could reveal how power struggles crystallize in the process of accessing water services. Everyday practices reveal the lived materialities and realities of residents in navigating inadequate hydraulic infrastructure and thus deepen the understanding of politics outside the realm of formal (normative) urban governance (Graham and Mc Farlane, 2014). Since infrastructures are dynamic, interrogating infrastructure should consider “their accretion and accumulation, their cracks and their fissures and the politics of their present and future” (Barry, 2015: unpaginated). Effectively, the past, current and future politics are (re)constituted since inadequate supply of water services leads people to maneuver the system to gain access to water by alternative means (Ahlers et al., 2014:2). For instance, in South Africa, the past politics of apartheid and how it configures infrastructural inequalities in the post-apartheid city has led to persistent inequalities in access to water services. Based on a study of the confluence of infrastructure and practices in the global North, Shove (2016) argues that a study of infrastructure can reveal the overlays in the conjunctions of infrastructure and practices and so form the basis for the construction of various practices while allowing multiple practices to take place at once. The co-evolution between infrastructure and everyday practices occurs in complicated and contested ways whereby infrastructure produces everyday practices and everyday practices generate infrastructure (ibid.). For instance, infrastructure may fail to generate the anticipated practices while some practices may persist in spite of the lack of infrastructure. Thus, a nuanced understanding of infrastructure calls for thinking beyond the material dimension to a more dynamic non-material sense of infrastructure to reveal the mutual co-constitution of everyday practices and infrastructure at different spaces and time (Shove and Trentmann, 2018). 8 1.5 IDENTIFICATION OF THE KNOWLEDGE GAP The knowledge gap addressed in this study was initially identified through my direct experience of the water services-access situation in Mukuru which provoked a need for the study (see Section 1.1). Later, I engaged with theory in search of explanations for what I had experienced directly. The gap that I identified in the theoretical explanations and my direct experience constituted the motivation of the study. In other words, both the direct experience and the theory guided the formulation of the research question of this study. Table 1. 1 captures the key contextual provocations that I experienced in Mukuru, how the provocations are understood and explained in literature, how the knowledge gap which motivated the study was arrived at in order to facilitate the original contribution of the study. The body of studies which informed my research aligns with calls to investigate the “informal social modes of interaction which operate with logics that are often autonomous to those of the state” but affect the governance of water services (RSA, 2003:9). Dugard (2016) also calls for further qualitative research on the concerns and experiences of households receiving basic water and those without access to piped water. Equally, Peloso and Morinville (2014:135) claim that “there is a disjuncture between realities of heterogenous water access and urban planning design that hinge on tap water infrastructure” which needs to be explored. In studying water services in urban areas, contemporary scholars have mainly focused on water urbanisation and the hydrosocial cycles (Bakker, 2003; Swyngedouw, 2005; Budds, Linton and Mcdonnell, 2014; Boelens et al., 2016). The hydrosocial cycle notion has moved away from considering water and water processes as apolitical and asocial by unpacking the political, social and economic channels through which water is circulated in the city and the power flows in water distribution (Budds et al., 2014). This perspective is instrumental in showing the social ecological processes that shape urbanisation processes. While this approach is significant in demonstrating how power influences the production and distribution of water, it pays inadequate attention to everyday practices and “microspheres of negotiations” generated by infrastructure as well as how the practices generate and (re)configure the material infrastructure (Gandy, 2008:125). 9 Table 1.1. Towards articulating the knowledge gap based on the empirical context and the theoretical understanding Empirical Context Theoretical understanding The knowledge gap Key elements/aspects of original contribution 1. Inadequate access to water services and a state of hopelessness in the residents. Simone (2004) in Johannesburg, South Africa. -The role of people-as- infrastructure where there is inadequate access to services. -Informal networks can provisionally close infrastructural gaps. Anand (2017) in Mumbai India -Water services provision is through relations between human and non- human infrastructure. McFarlane (2011) in Sao Paolo, Brazil and Mumbai, India. -Assemblage as a way to understand the complex relationships between the city as an everyday dwelling. -The manifestations of informal and social networks in the provision of water services in informal settlements. -The interactions between the different elements of the infrastructure assemblage in the provision of water services. Conditions and challenges of access to water services make normative modes of water governance malleable especially at the point-of-access. -The circle of water approach of access-use-disposal and its broader understanding of governance of water services. 2. Inadequate access to water services and a state of hopelessness in the residents. Bjorkman (2015) in Mumbai, India -Water flow and access as contingent on an assemblage of physical, power and fragmented knowledge/rumors infrastructure. -Who possesses the infrastructural knowledge? Is infrastructural knowledge gendered? -Men-as-infrastructure. -Gradual changes to infrastructure produce transformative reconfiguration that leads to emergence of non-normatives modes of governance. 3. Leaking plastic water pipes running through the settlement. Heidegger (1962) -The invisibility of infrastructure until there is a breakdown. -What factors contribute to the visibility of infrastructure in informal settlements? -People-as-infrastructure enhance the visibility of hydraulic infrastructure in informal settlements. 10 -Material hydraulic infrastructure is highly visible in informal settlements. 4. Continued provision of water services by cartels. Ngunyi and Katumanga (2014) in Nairobi, Kenya -State absence and state abstinence in service provision in low income areas. Razon (2017) in Southern Israel -Invisibility justifies neglect and inequalities in service provision. -Why does the state render certain practices and situations invisible? -Politics of invisibility as a manifestation of power relations between actors. -Politics of invisibility generates non-norative modes of water governance. 5. People queuing in line to procure water. Velzeboer et al. (2018) in Lilongwe, Malawi. -The human body as infrastructure in last mile delivery. -Is it the female or male human body that predominantly forms the hydraulic infrastructure? -Women-as-infrastructure -The female-black-body as infrastructure in the South African context. 6. Persistent protests Bayat (2010) Middle East -Quiet encroachment. Protests as a way of get the attention of the state. -Why is service provision still inadequate despite the continued protests? -Protests enhance the visibility of people-as-infrastructure. 11 In his seminal work, Being and Time, Heidegger (1962) claims that physical infrastructure is only visible when it breaks down. This idea has been contested in several studies such as Anand (2017) who argue that infrastructural breakdown brings to the fore the precarious nature of infrastructure as well as the fragile social agreements around it. He further contends that post-colonial states are characterised by hyper-visible infrastructure which shapes social and political processes of accessing resources and basic services (ibid). Therefore, although infrastructure in the global South is characterized by ubiquity and visibility, the link between the visibility and functionality of infrastructure cannot be explained by its breakdown only (ibid.). Revealing the factors that contribute to the visibility of infrastructure could give a more nuanced understanding of the social relations around infrastructure. Exploring the concept of visibility as used by residents and the state to serve their different purposes/interests could provide a more complex understanding of governance practices. For example, Razon’s (2017) study of Southern Israel found that the state employed invisibility to justify neglect and inequalities in services provision to the marginalized Bedouin citizens. Bayat (2010) study of the Middle East found that residents used invisibility through quiet encroachment which he defines as “silent, protracted, but pervasive advancement of the ordinary people on the propertied, powerful, or the public, in order to survive and improve their lives” (ibid: 46). In a study of informal economies in the inner city of post-apartheid Johannesburg, South Africa, Simone (2004) found a confluence of fluid and provisional infrastructure and practices employed by people at the margins to navigate the city and thus referred to the confluence as conjunctions of people-as-infrastructure. However, Simone’s notion of people-as-infrastructure does not depict how the different intersections such as gender, race and migrant status manifest in organizing the city. Similarly, Bjorkman (2015) study of water services in Mumbai, India, found an assemblage of physical, power and fragmented knowledge infrastructure which inhered with various actors. As with Simone’s notion of people-as-infrastructure, the study did not investigate the intersections of knowledge-as-infrastructure. Yet, exploring intersectionalities in these notions could reveal power relations and social inequalities between actors, their interactions and governance practices (Collins, 2016). Studies that have focused on the governance of water services in Africa include Peloso and Morinville (2013) who demonstrate how such everyday practices in Accra, Ghana, challenge the municipal water utility’s capacity to provide water services thus forcing households to pursue different options to meet their daily 12 water requirements. In their study of water services in low-income areas in Lilongwe, Malawi, Velzeboer et al. (2017) found that human bodies formed a critical element of the hydraulic infrastructure. However, the study did not examine if it was the male or the female body that predominantly formed the infrastructure. Similarly, in a comparative study in Mukuru, Nairobi, focusing on the everyday interfaces of state and non- state actors in provision of water, sanitation and electricity services, Sverdlik’s (2017) found variations in the interfaces of actors differentiated along the frequency of interactions, the level of bribery and probability for conflict. This comparative study examines the governance of water services through an infrastructure lens in Mukuru, Nairobi and Kya Sands, Johannesburg, South Africa. 1.6 PROBLEM STATEMENT Water governance influences the extent of water access at various levels of society and therefore governance should form a key component towards addressing backlogs and challenges to water access (Tropp, 2006). Franks and Cleaver (2007) contend that deliberate and unintentional water governance systems are created through informal processes and practices of daily life of households. The normative governance structures may evolve owing to the agents’ daily practices that shape water access through different norms and concerns (ibid.). Thus, water governance comprises both formal practices and everyday practices where the normative practices are conveyed through state management processes while everyday practices are less visible and defined, while nonetheless impacting on water access, use and disposal by the poor (ibid.). Zwarteveen et al. (2017:6) contend that “powers of control are the product of complex negotiations that only partly occur in formally designated water governance domains” because the deliberate and emergent practices (re)constitute and (re)create structures. A study of water governance based on a better understanding of the formal processes in interaction with everyday practices provides useful empirical underpinnings for more responsive policy making (ibid.). This study explored how infrastructure can foreground the complexities emerging from the diverse interactions which underpin urban water governance as an outcome of various practices among the key actors. A focus on the practices of water services access, use and disposal gives a better understanding of the agentic nature of infrastructure, the relationship between infrastructure and practices as well as their co- constitution and mutual shaping of each other. Although infrastructure may be invisible in the formal realm of water provision, it is operated through various (in)visible practices and arrangements which mediate resource flows as well as power and social relations (Shove and Trentmann, 2018). Further, given that infrastructure 13 is continually appropriated to access resources, the analysis of practices, actors, processes and contestations at the urban margins can show new patterns which could inform a better understanding of governance (Coutard and Rutherford, 2015). Whereas the connective dimension of infrastructure is evident through bridging people in different spaces and times, it also disconnects others in the same space to produce inequalities in access to resources and services. A good starting point in examining governance of water services, would be through exploring ‘who’ and ‘what’ is included in various infrastructure arrangements, mainly because the approach uncovers the levels of agency possessed by the different actors. Using an infrastructure lens enables the agency of both the infrastructure and the various actors (as well as intersections such as gender, race, age) to be investigated. Further, the differentiated configurations of urban infrastructure facilitate situated analysis and understandings which in turn enables theoretical generalization about infrastructure. In order to adequately address water access challenges, there is a critical need for a more nuanced understanding of the reality on the ground. The urban water governance lens investigates the status quo of conditions and challenges of water services, actors and their practices as well as the processes of negotiation for gaining and maintaining access so as to point to possible alternatives for urban water access (McFarlane and Silver, 2017). This entails asking questions such as: How do residents of informal settlements meet their daily water requirements? What are the lived materialities and realities of residents of informal settlements in accessing, using and disposing of wastewater? What are the interactions of actors in gaining and maintaining water access, use and disposal? Guided by the research question presented in the next sub-section, the study endeavoured to fill the knowledge gaps identified above based on the following research question and a comparative study of two informal settlements, one in Nairobi, Kenya, and the other one in Johannesburg, South Africa. Figure 1.1 presents the generalized mapping of the key elements of the motivation of the study. 1.6.1 Research Question Arising from the context and motivation presented in the previous sections, the study was guided by the following research question: 14 What are the modes of water governance in urban informal settlements in Kenya and South Africa ? With specific reference to the case studies of Mukuru in Nairobi, Kenya, and Kya Sands in Johannesburg, South Africa, the sub-questions of the study were conceptualised as follows: 1. What are the conditions and key challenges of water access, use and disposal in informal settlements? 2. Who are the key actors and their roles in water services in informal settlements? 3. How do people in informal settlements negotiate and secure water access? What are the inter and intra- household dynamics regarding water access in informal settlements? 1.6.2 Working Hypothesis Based on the preliminary understanding surrounding the study the working hypothesis was conceptualized as follows: Based on the preliminary understanding surrounding the study, the working hypothesis was conceptualized as follows: The modes of water services governance emerge from the diverse responses of actors in their roles and practices versus the conditions and challenges in gaining and maintaining water access. The conditions and challenges of access to water services in informal settlements render the normative mode of water governance highly malleable at the point of access and induce non-normative governance modes characterized by perpetual suspension-of-rules which create the critical fluidity and space for (re)negotiated access. Similarly, the agency of material infrastructure is enhanced beyond what would normally be envisaged under normative mode of governance while human bodies become deeply enmeshed into the material infrastructure at the point of water access. Access to water services is therefore sustained through an assemblage of infrastructure comprising material, people and knowledge elements with invented coproduction as a key component of the process. 1.6.3 Delimiting the scope of the study This study investigated the formal and informal elements of the governance of water services through elements of infrastructure. Thus, the study is intended to be situated within the focus areas such as non- 15 normative governance, infrastructure and social relations, and thus only partially links to some fields such as normative governance, neoliberalism and commodification. Whereas as an area of study informal settlements is a huge field with enormous theoretical underpinnings, this study limits itself to two spatially bounded settlements which are characterised by different demographic and social-economic/political underpinnings. However, since informal settlements do not happen in a ‘vacuum’ (they are actually categorized as so on the basis of being deemed to share multiple attributes irrespective of their diverse unique attributes on a case-by-case basis), the findings from these case studies could be relevant to other informal settlements with similar peculiarities and might therefore be useful in re- conceptualising the governance of water services. However, even though sources covering other case studies have been reviewed and cited in the study, the comparison of the findings from these case studies with experiences in other informal settlements in both or other countries, does not constitute part of this study. 16 Figure 1.1: Overall mapping of the study (Author, 2021) 17 1.7 THE RESEARCH STRATEGY: LINEAR OR ITERATIVE? Given the complexity of the research objectives, the overall research strategy was iterative and non-linear. This entailed a back and forth process that involved going over literature review, data collection, data analysis as well as fine-tuning the research questions repeatedly. Moreover, the methodology and the theoretical/conceptual framework were iteratively refined throughout the entire research process. The research strategy is represented diagrammatically in Figure 1.2. In a nutshell, Stage 1 aimed at generating a research proposal and involved appraisal of background studies on water governance in order to formulate the initial research question and study objectives. This stage also entailed the selection of the two case studies that formed the basis of the comparative study. At the end of this stage the research proposal was submitted for examination and later defended before a panel. Stage 2 involved the second iteration of the research proposal as well as the application for ethics clearance. Research instruments were prepared based on ongoing literature review and physical/reconnaissance visits to the two case study sites. Primary data collection was carried out from August 2018 to June 2019. Data analyses were done concurrently with data collection as well as after the data collection activities. Preliminary analyses during data collection stage was conducted so as to establish if there were missing data and to identify any gaps that needed to be filled through subsequent data collection processes. As the field work progressed, I began to sense that the data collection phase was suggesting the need for a new lens to interpret the data which gave the literature review process a reflective dimension as opposed to a merely propositional appraisal exercise. The initial supposition before the preliminary field work was the salient influence of material infrastructure in access to water services but gradually the mediating role of infrastructure was extended to include both the human and non-human elements of infrastructure. Likewise, the findings reinforced my initial proposition of adopting a theoretical bricolage approach to anchor the study. The approach comprised of theoretical principles distilled from diverse multiple disciplines to the research problem given its complexity. The responses from the interviews and observations of the practices on the ground as well as the patterns that emerged from the initial data analyses in the field contributed to a radical change in the choice of previous studies and related approaches to their appraisal. 18 Stage 3 entailed further data analyses, synthesis of findings and writing up of the study. Moreover, the research question and objectives were revisited at this stage in order to assess if they were adequately addressed and the extent to which the initially identified knowledge gaps had been filled. In all stages, working papers were generated some of which were presented in international conferences as indicated in the declaration section of this thesis (see page ii). Figure 1.2: The iterative research strategy employed in the study (Author, 2020) 19 The study employed a comparative and qualitative methodology which involved situating the research within the setting where participants have real time experience of the issue being investigated (Creswell, 2007). A multi-method data collection approach was used in order to triangulate the data gathered from both research contexts. The study relied on direct observation mainly based on transect walks, documentary analysis, in- depth interviews with key informants, residents and water vendors, as well as focus group discussions (FGDs). Thematic data analyses were executed through a dual system that interlinked automated data analysis using Atlas ti (a qualitative data computer aided software) and manual data coding based on matrices. The comprehensive research methods utilized for the study are elaborated in Chapter 3. 1.8 THE STRUCTURE OF THE THESIS This section presents an outline of the nine interlinked chapters of this thesis as guided by the overarching research question and the sub-questions. The first chapter presents the background of the study, the statement of the research problem, the research question, objectives, a working hypothesis and the research strategy. Chapter 2 presents the literature appraisal and theoretical underpinnings of the study. It appraises the literature on core relevant theories and concepts in order to adequately guide data collection and analysis towards the resolution of the sub-questions and the overall research question. The chapter reviews relevant studies based on the main themes of governance, infrastructure, actors and power, coproduction and assemblages. It therefore anchors the empirical research and discussions of the findings from the case studies. From the literature review, the research gaps addressed by the study were generated as well as a conceptual framework of water governance to guide the rest of the study. Chapter 3 presents the research design and methodology. A justification of the case study design is presented as well as a brief introduction of the two case study areas. The chapter then presents the data collection methods and tools followed by a presentation of the various anticipated and emergent ethical challenges faced during the fieldwork and in the course of the research. In response to sub-question 1, Chapter 4 presents the conditions and challenges of water services in Mukuru. As a basis of providing an extensive background to the provision of water services for the settlement, the chapter examines the physical, socioeconomic and legislative profiles as well as the legal and institutional frameworks governing the settlement. This chapter forms the background for subsequent data presentation and analyses in Chapter 5. 20 Chapter 5 addresses the second and third sub-questions on the state and non-state actors in the case of Mukuru. The chapter further elucidates the practices of the different actors in gaining, maintenance and denial of access to water services. The chapter shows how the complexity and intensity of the water services problem leads the state opting not to “see” it. The chapter goes on to reveal the challenges encountered by the state in trying to regain control over the distribution of water services after takeover by elite groups. Chapter 6 deals with the first sub-question on the conditions and challenges of water services provision in Kya Sands. The chapter foregrounds the mutual interdependence between the provision of basic services in the settlement. Besides, the chapter also demonstrates the crucial role of social relations in access to water services. Chapter 7 presents discussions on the second and third sub-questions on the actors and their practices in water services in Kya Sands. Equally, the chapter shows the power struggles among different actors and the strategies they employ at different times and spaces in pursuit of their water-related interests. The chapter demonstrates that state actors possessed static knowledge of the water reticulation while the residents possessed intelligence of the water reticulation which remained dynamic and fluid. Chapter 8 presents a cross-case analysis of the sub-findings emerging from both case studies as consolidated in the substantive chapters and engaging them ‘in conversation’ with theory and the conceptual framework adopted for the study in order to address the sub-questions and the overarching research question. Chapter 9 draws a synthesis of the resolution of the overall research finding through a weaving of the sub-findings towards an overall consolidation of findings and conclusions on the research question based on the theoretical reflections the sub-findings from the case study. In addition to substantiating the findings, the chapter further links the salient issues with the literature and the conceptual framework presented in Chapter 2. The original knowledge contribution of the study, the limitations of the study and recommendations for future research are then articulated and presented. The final part of the study constitutes the additional but relevant information in the form of appendices which provide a more enriched perspective of the research. 21 CHAPTER TWO 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 INTRODUCTION - AN OVERVIEW OF THE THEORETICAL FIELDS This chapter presents literature appraisal of theories, concepts and empirical studies which anchored the research. The chapter therefore crystallizes the key ideas and concepts relevant to the study as shown in Figure 2.1. These include infrastructure, governance, actors, power, agency, coproduction and everyday practices. These concepts together create the foundation for the “theoretical bricolage” used to investigate water governance in informal settlements of cities of the South (Kincheloe, 2001:335). Theoretical bricolage entails moving beyond and across different disciplines in the research process, knowledge production and interpretation as well as actively constructing research approaches based on multiple lenses to study a research problem. Furthermore, the application of bricolage entails recognizing that a multilateral view of the subject under study is likely to lead to a deeper inquiry of reality or phenomenon under investigation as a result of the multiple perspectives of the analyses (ibid.). Moreover, employing a single lens to a research problem such as the one identified for this study ignores the dynamics of power inherent in hybrid and negotiated forms of governance. The guiding approach emanated from the challenges and opportunities encountered in addressing the research question from a single discipline. Theoretical bricolage of various social theories and philosophies was applied in order to adequately situate the study as well as to guide the articulation of the theoretical framework. In addition, a bricolage approach was expected to enable greater theoretical coherence given that a single approach would be inadequate to fulfill the requirements of the complex research objectives. Likewise, the increased quest for relevant and coherent policies calls for the integration of diverse disciplines so as to address the matter in question (Kincheloe, 2001). The complexity and fluidity of everyday life makes it imperative to understand the daily lived experiences as well as their processes and changes thus enabling a more enhanced understanding of phenomena such as the highly dynamic water access scenarios in informal settlements. The study utilized theoretical insights from disciplines as such anthropology, political science human geography and sociology to facilitate better engagement with the complex reality under investigation. Studies such as Cleaver (2002); Cleaver and Koning (2015); Achwoka (2016) utilized this approach to analyze water governance by using concepts from diverse disciplines in order to gain a better understanding of governance processes. 22 The chapter presents the theoretical underpinnings of the study as guided by the theory of infrastructure and its relevance to analyzing the status quo of water services in the informal settlements. This include the concept of water governance, actors in water services, the state and its practices, individual and collective agency and everyday practices. I consulted and appraised a broad range of studies and later on prioritized which among them was most relevant for my study. Table 2.1 presents the schedule of appraised sources according to key knowledge/theoretical-themes and the layers of readings either as core, secondary or tertiary pertinent for the study. As elaborated in detail in Chapter 9, the core readings also constitute the primary references from which original contribution of the study was envisaged, pursued and assessed at the end of the study while the secondary and tertiary readings provide literature on the narrower categories such as specific sub-fields of the research. 2.2 THEORY OF INFRASTRUCTURE In the recent past, academic debates in anthropology and urban studies around the concept of infrastructure and its impact on everyday life have become salient (Bjorkman, 2014; McFarlane and Graham, 2015; Anand, 2017,). The tension between the constitutive dimension (material form) and the connective dimension (how infrastructure structures relations) and the different meanings and interpretations that infrastructural dimensions evoke for different people is useful in examining everyday life around various infrastructure (Anand, 2017). In order to access resources, actors rework and adapt material structures thereby making infrastructure “a relational space of investigation” that examines the dynamic relations around and produced by the infrastructure (Venkatesan et al., 2018:2). Given that material forms are unequally distributed, people and things interact in disparate ways that produce diverse and uncertain political outcomes which constitute the modes of governance. Adopting an infrastructure lens in this study enabled me to investigate how infrastructure configures and is in turn configured by the urban informal settlement space and its role in shaping urban spaces as arenas of “commonality, interaction and conflict” (McFarlane, 2011:217). Given that people often negotiate through the visible and hidden elements of infrastructure, both the technical and symbolic orientations can be analyzed to reveal the social relations and the microspheres of negotiation for water access (Anand, 2012). Additionally, the concept is also relevant in demonstrating how people appropriate infrastructure both to cope with water scarcity as well as for economic gains. Likewise, “.. infrastructures are very good to think with. They are materially, socially, and symbolically dense; (…) often banal, (…) taken for granted; yet they are 23 KEY THEORETICAL/KNOWLEDGE THEME CORE SOURCES (INTERNATIONAL, GLOBAL, SOUTH, LOCAL) SECONDARY SOURCES TERTIARY SOURCES Infrastructure Heidegger (1962) ‘Being and time’ Review Simone (2004) ‘People-as- infrastructure’(South Africa) Bjorkman (2015) ‘Pipe Politics, Contested Waters’ (India) Harries (2014) (South Africa, Ghana) Bowker et al.(2010) Review Venkatesan et al. (2018) Review Larkin (2013) Review von Schnitzler (2008) (South Africa) Bear et al. (2014) Review Assemblages McFarlane (2009, 2011) Cities as assemblages (Brazil and India) Farias (2010) Review Farias, I. and Bender T. (2011) Review Koster (2019) Brazil Governance and the role of the state Pierre and Peters (2005) Governing Complex Societies: Trajectories and Scenarios Review Ngunyi and Katumanga (2014) From Monopoly to Oligopoly of Violence: Exploration of a Four-point Hypothesis Regarding Organised and Organic Militia in Kenya (Kenya) Brenner and Theodore (2002): On neoliberalism Review Miraftab (2004) Making Neo-liberal Governance: The Disempowering Work of Empowerment (South Africa) Razon (2017) ). Seeing and Unseeing Like a State (Israel) Roy (2009) Why India cannot plan its cities (India) Budds and Mc Ghanahan (2003) (Global South) Bakker and Morinville (2013) Review Fukuyama (2013) Review Kuchinskaya (2014) Belarus Table 2.1 : Layers of pertinent theoretical sources 24 Actors, power and agency Mann(2008): Infrastructural power revisited Review Wafer (2011): Informality, Infrastructure and the State in post-apartheid Johannesburg (South Africa) Bayat (2000, 2010): Life as Politics. How Ordinary People Change the Middle East (Middle East) Chatterjee (2004) The Politics of the Governed— Reflections on Popular Politics in Most of the World (India) Bjorkman (2015) India Sverdlik (2017) Kenya Hufty (2011) Review Ballard (2015) (South Africa) Social relations Bourdieu (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice Review Bourdieu (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste Review Bourdieu (1990) The logic of practice Review Bourdieu and Wacquant (1992) An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology Review Katsaura (2013) (South Africa) Benit-Gbaffou and Katsaura (2014) (South Africa) Zimmer and Sakdapolrak (2012) (India) Zug (2014) South Sudan Giddens (1984) Review Coproduction Ostrom (1996) Crossing the great divide: coproduction, synergy and development (Brazil and Nigeria) Mitlin (2008) With and beyond the state — co- production as a route to political influence, power and transformation for grassroots organizations. (Global South) Cornwall (2000 and 2002) Making spaces, changing places: situating participation in development’ Joshi and Moore (2004) Ghana and Pakistan Watson (2014) South Africa Mitlin and Bartlett (2018) Global South Makau and Lines (2018) Kenya Mintzberg and Waters (1985) Review Olumuyiwa (2016) South Africa 25 the bearers of (……) an easier life, safety, security (Watts, 2018 as cited in Anand et al., 2018: unpaginated). Hence, thinking with and through an infrastructure lens is useful in exploring the conditions and challenges of water services in informal settlements. For purposes of this study, infrastructure has been conceptualised as an assemblage of material forms (water distribution systems), people (human body and social relations) and knowledge which are diagrammatically represented in Figure 2.1 (see Section 2.3 for review on assemblages. The rest of this section further elaborates the three components of infrastructure (material, people and knowledge). The section begins with a review of sources on material infrastructure as commonly understood and its relationships with the other two dimensions of infrastructure. Figure 2.1: The assemblage of infrastructure (Source: Author, 2019) 2.2.1 Infrastructure as Material The material forms of infrastructure mainly consist of the physical substances such as pipes, pumps and taps through which water passes while dictating the type of networks, the flow rate and the destination of the water (Heidegger, 1962 and Larkin, 2013). In his seminal work, Being and Time, Heidegger (1962) provides an 26 ontological foundation for the being of things which serves as a point of departure for the discourse on infrastructure as applied in this study. He examined the various modes of existence of objects and the way people encounter objects both from a theoretical perspective and in their everyday experiences (ibid). The two concepts of his philosophical thinking that prove to be particularly relevant for this study are Dasein and equipment (things) as they facilitated deeper understanding of the phenomena under investigation. Heidegger’s core argument is that our understanding of and the meanings attached to the being of things provides us a particular way of relating to things (ibid). He argues that in order to understand the “being” of the object under study, it is important to know the entity through which being is to be captured (ibid). In other words, who is knowing the object? He introduces the notion of Dasein to denote the “way of being of humans” which essentially shapes how they perceive things (ibid). The distinction between Dasein and other entities is important because human beings have agency and can choose how or who to be through their everyday activities and through inferred meaning(s) to such activities (ibid.). This understanding of Dasein was applied in this study to facilitate the investigation of the everyday modes of engagement between people as well as the way people attribute meanings to their everyday experiences. Visibility of infrastructure Heidegger (1962) further elaborates the three modes of encounter between people and equipment as they perform the tasks at hand and how these encounters produce (in)visibility of the equipment. Firstly, the readiness-to-hand mode occurs when a person focuses on the task-at-hand and is not conscious of the equipment being employed because it is functioning properly. Thus, the person has minimal conscious awareness of the equipment in use it thus moves to the background (subconscious) (ibid). Since the equipment functions as it should, and the user does not pay attention to it, it appears to be “invisible” to the conscious mind. Secondly, the present-at-hand mode occurs when the experience with the equipment is no longer the point of attention but the equipment itself becomes an independent object that takes away the attention of the subject for instance when an equipment breaks down while in use (ibid). Present-at-hand makes the everyday experiencing-user of the equipment to pay attention to the object making it “visible”. Finally, the unreadiness at hand takes place when the activity is interrupted by the breakdown of the equipment and therefore the task cannot be accomplished. He points out that the being of equipment is a totality which allows it to do what it is meant to do (ibid). 27 Heidegger (1962) moves on to discuss the disruptions of the readiness-to-hand encounter through which the ready-at-hand equipment becomes visible and interferes with performance of the task. The equipment becomes present-at-hand thus interfering with and reconstructing the everyday experiences and practices. Examining disruptions reveals how infrastructural breakdowns impact on everyday life as well as how these breakdowns shift focus to the infrastructure itself at the cost of target-task (Baumgardt, 2017). In discussing the visibility of infrastructure, Heidegger (1962:102) points out that the disruptions “permit the entities with which we concern ourselves to be encountered in such a way that the worldly character of what is within the world comes to the fore”. Heidegger’s argument that infrastructure is generally invisible but becomes visible when disruptions occur is crucial for this study in exploring the conditions of the hydraulic infrastructure in both study contexts. There are three types of disruptions that make infrastructure “visible” namely conspicuousness, obtrusiveness and obstinacy (ibid.). Conspicuousness is a disruption that occurs when equipment does not serve the purpose for which it was intended because it is deficient or defective (ibid; Harries, 2014). Obtrusiveness takes place when the equipment needed to perform a task is not-at-hand and therefore is not available to be used. Finally, obstinacy arises where equipment is neither missing nor unusable but simply “stand in the way of our concern” thereby drawing our attention to it and yet we have no time to focus on them (Heidegger, 1962:103). Heidegger’s (1971) work on ‘Building dwelling thinking’ conceptualizes the idea of dwelling as a place where things or material objects gather and is actualized through the everyday practices in the inhabited space (ibid). He states that, “spaces through which we go daily are provided for by locations; their nature is grounded in things, (…) relations between locations and spaces, (…) help us in thinking of the relationship between man and space (ibid:6). Thus, dwelling has a connective property and discourses on dwelling necessarily involves relations that connect spaces. Heidegger further argues that dwelling “accomplishes its nature in the raising of locations by the joining of their spaces” (ibid.:8). This understanding of dwelling can reveal the interactions between people and equipment in the assemblage where the agency of the individual material parts and the collective change both temporally and spatially. Given that dwelling extends beyond technical dimensions to include relations around an object connecting spaces through an assembly, the concept of dwelling as is related to discussions on assemblages by McFarlane (2009, 2011) is presented in Section 2.3. Investigating the visibility of infrastructure provides an understanding of how the “everyday infrastructural experience” generates different social relations and everyday experiences (Graham and McFarlane, 2015:1). 28 Heidegger’s views on infrastructure enable the theorization of the pervasiveness and invisibility of infrastructure as well as the capacity of infrastructure to shape and change our perception of everyday life (Heidegger, 1962) Moreover, questions of visibility and invisibility are important manifestations of the workings of power and control over the infrastructure (ibid.). Likewise, Heidegger’s notions of ‘ready-to-hand’ a